At Acculturated, a debate broke out as to the value and relevance of the traditional diamond engagement ring. I learned some things about the tradition that I hadn't even considered before. It's a lively point-counterpoint that just might make you view things a bit differently...
Give Diamonds the (Other) Finger
A diamond is forever. This scam has become so commonplace that nobody stops to think about it anymore. Nobody seems to know why we give diamond rings other than because, well, we just do. Nobody seems to know, or care about, the insidious history behind these expensive but essentially useless rocks. Diamonds have become so standard, so expected, that a modern proposal would seem incomplete or insincere without one.
And so many women, having been told that "diamonds are a girl's best friend," have such high hopes about their "dream diamond" that they're sometimes reduced to tears when the one they eventually get isn't what they wanted since they were a little girl. A recent survey found that ten percent of women would turn down a man's proposal if they didn't like the ring, and that 15 percent of newly engaged women cry about their rings after getting engaged. (Yet somehow "waterproof mascara is a girl's best friend" just doesn't have the same ring to it.)
With this kind of pressure, and with an average price tag of about five grand, it makes you wonder: why do we give diamond rings anyway?
Well, because once upon a time, a rich and powerful company told us to. The diamond craze can be traced back to one company and a marketing campaign so influential it won the hearts and checkbooks of lovebirds everywhere.
In Defense of Diamond Engagement Rings
Chelsea Samelson (full disclosure: my sister) makes the case here that it's time to do away with diamond rings.
She makes some good points. The history of diamond rings is a morally fraught one that includes marketing ploys and conflict stones. And I completely believe that ring lust exists, and thus, disappointed or envious brides-to-be. The celebrity world doesn't help, the very world Chelsea points out helped to create the marketplace, at the behest of diamond behemoth De Beers. The most expensive known engagement ring in American history is on the finger of Beyoncé, with a staggering price tag of five million dollars. And of the celebrities whose rings cost the most, many are no longer married to the man who purchased it.
I suppose that I feel the same way about diamond rings as I do about Valentine's Day, another tradition premised on love with strong consumerist undertones. Like diamond rings, Valentine's Day puts pressure on men to spend, and sets expectations for women that often are not realistic. While supposedly celebrating a Christian martyr, it's really the concoction of Hallmark, candy companies, and florists. For a holiday that is supposed to be about love and sacrifice, it feels a lot like it's about overpriced prix fixe and wrapping paper.
But should we abandon the holiday altogether?
I say no, and I say no to getting rid of the tradition of proposing with a diamond ring. We live in a culture where love is a tarnished and elusive thing for many people, a culture where people seek romance in bars and in chat rooms. We also live in a country where marriage is increasingly devalued as an institution. According to Pew, less than one in three Americans age 18-29 say that having a successful marriage is one of the most important things in life. Four in ten Americans say marriage is obsolete. Yikes.
So why get rid of the things that symbolize marriage?
No comments:
Post a Comment